Criminal Application seeking condonation of 406 days delay in filing appeal. Court allowed application, holding litigant not to suffer for lawyer's misadvice, on payment of costs.
Application allowed subject to payment of Rs.2500 costs to respondents within two weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
appln 403-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 403 OF 2011
Shri Vantian Sandiagu
...Applicant
vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
Mr.J.M. Puranik for the Applicant. Mr.A.R. Patil, APP for the State. Ms.Leena Patil for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
CORAM : R.C. CHAVAN, J.
JULY 4, 2012
P.C. :-
1 This is an application for condonation of delay of 406 days in filing application for leave to file
appeal against order of dismissal of complaint
no.832/2002 passed by the learned JMFC, Ulhasnagar on 26th November, 2009.
2 The learned Counsel for respondents has raised a serious objection and she stated that delay is not at all property explained.
3 According to the applicant, the delay was
sat 1/2
appln 403-2011
occasioned because the applicant was wrongly advised to approach the Sessions Court at Kalyan and file was lost in getting correct advise. If a litigant was wrongly advised by the lawyer, the litigant should not be drastically suffer. The learned Counsel states that advise was given by the same Advocate who represented the complainant in the trial court. Thus, he stands identified. Though the respondent has an objection, since
the litigant may not suffer because of the wrong advise of the Advocate, application is allowed subject to the applicant paying costs quantified at Rs.2500/- to be paid to the respondent within two weeks. If the costs are not paid, the order shall stand revoked without reference to the Court.
The application is disposed of.
(R.C. CHAVAN, J.)
sat 2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay was warranted despite poor explanation due to misadvice by counsel.
Shri Vantian Sandiagu
State of Maharashtra
R.C. CHAVAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
